291–300 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? > Though some people in some companies might be laid…
> Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? It's here, you're living in it, most likely. You just have to lower your wants to the standards of whenever that prediction was made.
It's not like there's unclaimed habitable territory that anyone can just go be subsistence farmers on - someone has laid claim to that land and it's not you
So, no this isn't an option either as you're forced to interact with the rest of the world that demands your input
The big oversight here is that Priya does not want a job , what Priya wants is an income . The point of life is not working, the point of life is to enjoy it. We should strive to eliminate as many jobs as we possibly can, the less we have to work the better it is. To make this possible we need to find a way to a new system that doesn't directly link labour with income .
Sure, that would be great but history has shown this is a beautiful but naive pipe dream. It doesn't take into account the ambition and greed of humans and their capacity to exploit others.
The talking computers will rapidly become perfect therapists and perfect salesmen. They can talk us "down off the ledge".
1) Chaudry's article is amazing in its lack of creative thinking. If people like Priya can be ~10 times more productive wielding some AI tools, that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. Though some people in some companies might be laid off, it doesn't necessarily mean that more people will be laid off than new jobs…
There are some real problems here. For example can the economy even support 10X production?
Ag -> Industrial -> Information transitions were all supported by a mix of massive expansion in population, mass migration of populations, and globalization of economies
information -> automation transition does not seem to have these 3 things in the same way. Globalism is slowing or reversing into protectionism. Migration is still high but seemingly for different reasons (geopolitical) as people displaced for war, crime, or climate and critical for this discussion population growth as SLOWED way down, and it expected to reserve about 2040.
This means people looking at the historical models for how these tech disruptions played in are very flawed in their "everything will be just fine" handwavium
My prediction is we will see a MASSIVE increase in weath gaps, and extreme decrease in standard of living in most of the industrial world (we are already seeing this in a limited way) leading to more and more political instability
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? > Though some people in some companies might be laid…
How much do you think you would have had to pay for an iPhone 200 years ago? Are you sure society hasn't benefitted from productivity increases?
The world would be a much better place without the iPhone[1].
[1] with the exception of all iPhones running iOS 6 or earlier
> Lex Fridman in his podcast said “if you’re anxious about GPT4 its probably because you’re a shitty programmer”. This sob story is proof he’s right.
Historically we’ve set aside a certain capacity, in almost every profession, to bring up and train the next generation. Apprenticeships, internships, etc. By definition, these people are shitty at their jobs, and that’s kinda the point. Were you brilliant at your first position?
1) Chaudry's article is amazing in its lack of creative thinking. If people like Priya can be ~10 times more productive wielding some AI tools, that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. Though some people in some companies might be laid off, it doesn't necessarily mean that more people will be laid off than new jobs…
> that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? > Though some people in some companies might be laid…
The big oversight here is that Priya does not want a job , what Priya wants is an income . The point of life is not working, the point of life is to enjoy it. We should strive to eliminate as many jobs as we possibly can, the less we have to work the better it is. To make this possible we need to find a way to a new system that doesn't directly link labour with income .
What a profoundly naive opinion. Most people find meaning, fulfillment, even contentment in working, especially when the problems are engaging and the solutions produce value. Many people claim their lives would be better if they never had to work, but they are bullshitting themselves with childhood naivete. Not working is a sucking void of boredom, nihilism, hedonism, and despair. I've been through some of that befo…
I would prefer if you expressed your disagreement without denigrating GP like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Because the only two options are capitalism and communism ? Communism doesn't work so just let's give up, not try anything else and let the rich exploit the majority of the human race.
Everyone here knows the last time it was tried, it ended in complete failure. Just like the previous attempts did. Such hopelessly utopian ideas getting laughed out of the room once again.